In this blog post, we delve deeply into whether the protagonist of Shakespeare’s tragedy ‘Macbeth’ is a man torn by conflict or a ruthless murderer.
Can Macbeth Be Forgiven?
Macbeth, one of Shakespeare’s Four Great Tragedies, can be described as a world drenched in blood. The play unfolds with countless lives lost, culminating in the tragic demise of the protagonist himself. Set against the backdrop of medieval Scotland’s dark times, it depicts how the nobleman Macbeth and his wife commit murder to seize power, ultimately leading to their ruin.
Driven by a lust for power, the protagonist orchestrates all events only to meet a miserable end. Shakespeare likely intended to convey the lesson of karma through this narrative. However, in modern times, classical literature is interpreted in various ways. There is a tendency to assign contemporary meaning and interpretation to the work itself, rather than focusing solely on the author’s original intent. Macbeth also invites diverse interpretations. Some view his character with sympathy and understanding, focusing on his internal conflict between the desire for power and his moral anguish. There is a perspective that seeks to shield him, arguing his actions stemmed from the witches’ prophecies and his wife’s incitement. Furthermore, some interpretations see him as representing the struggles of modern individuals in an era of endless competition. Of course, no reader would consider Macbeth’s actions justified. Yet many feel compassion and sympathy for him amidst his human conflicts and circumstances, even seeking to shield him. His struggle between good and evil transforms him from a mere murderer into a tragic hero demonstrating the nobility of humanity.
However, such interpretations of Macbeth are overly lenient. In modern society, where even stealing a loaf of bread to stave off hunger invites condemnation, there is no reason to be lenient only toward Macbeth, who committed serial murders for his own power. Even if the circumstances around him pushed him toward murder, the core problem lies with Macbeth himself, and there is absolutely no room for sympathy toward him.
Murder is unforgivable, regardless of its motive!
The play meticulously depicts Macbeth’s psychological transformation before killing the king. Torn by conflict, Macbeth kills the king at his wife’s urging, then suffers from anxiety due to the shock, foreseeing that he will never sleep soundly again. The human conflict Macbeth experiences over this murder and the anxiety and guilt he feels afterward can make the audience feel pity and sympathy for him.
But upon reflection, who among us would commit murder without experiencing conflict, anxiety, or guilt? Yet we do not sympathize with such murderers. Because murder itself is inhuman.
All humans struggle between good and evil. From minor breaches of public order to theft and murder, when committing acts universally deemed evil, one inevitably feels these emotions. Did not Lady Macbeth, who seemed so strong, ultimately succumb to guilt and take her own life? Yet, to sympathize with someone who committed murder—arguably the most inhumane act—simply because they experienced human conflict and anxiety is an excessively lenient attitude. If we consider the victims and their families who suffered because of that murder, could we even utter the word “sympathy” in their presence? I can confidently say that no normal person would.
In the play, Macbeth took the lives of countless people: the King, two guards, Banquo, and even Macduff’s family. Whether Macbeth proved the nobility of humanity or felt guilt, he can never be forgiven. For Macbeth can never compensate for the lives of so many. Moreover, the fact that he committed these acts not for any righteous cause, but solely for personal desire and power, makes it impossible to contain one’s anger.
The root of all this lies in Macbeth’s own ambition!
The catalyst for Macbeth’s inner turmoil began when the witches’ first prophecy—that he would become Thane—came true. Furthermore, it was his wife who urged him on when he hesitated before killing the king. In this sense, it might seem possible to shift some blame for the murders.
But considering the fundamental starting point, that is not the case. For everything began with Macbeth’s own desire. When he first heard the witches’ prophecy, it’s possible he felt tempted. Anyone might waver when tempted, but not everyone betrays their lord. Even considering the countless loyal vassals known throughout history, the mere possibility of wavering cannot serve as an excuse for Macbeth’s betrayal. In other words, he possessed a desire for power from the very beginning. The witches’ prophecy merely confirmed this. The first prophecy happened to come true by chance, but the second prophecy about becoming king was something Macbeth himself brought about. He wrote letters to his wife, devised plans, and even went so far as to kill the king himself. Of course, Macbeth experienced conflict during this time, but ultimately, he acted according to his own will and brought about the outcome. It was such a meticulous plan that perhaps he only lacked the courage to execute it, while everything was already decided in his heart.
After becoming king, Macbeth cannot control his own desires and greed. He crosses the line he should have guarded, rampaging to slaughter Macduff’s family and reigning as a tyrant. He shows no shock at his wife’s suicide, driven by guilt, focusing solely on Macduff’s army threatening his power. This could be seen as foreshadowing his wife’s death. Yet, it highlights how deeply entrenched his desire to protect his power and ambition was, allowing him to dismiss his wife’s death as trivial.
Had Macbeth harbored no desire for power, he would have dismissed the witches’ prophecy. Furthermore, if his loyalty to the king had outweighed his lust for power, he would have chosen loyalty in his conflict. He would not have sent his wife the letter about the witches’ prophecy. Consequently, there would have been no wife to incite him to commit murder. Even if Lady Macbeth had known about the witches’ prophecy, she would have abandoned the plan if she had known Macbeth lacked ambition for power. Everything stemmed from Macbeth’s own excessive desire, and he cannot shift the blame onto anyone else.
There is no room for sympathy for Macbeth!
Most people live by their conscience and morality. Even when tempted, they rarely cross the established line. This is not due to a lack of courage, but because conscience and conviction provide restraint.
But Macbeth could not do this. His desire, amplified by the witches’ prophecy, crossed the line that should not be crossed, ultimately leading to murder. Of course, he experienced inner conflict before committing murder and was later tormented by guilt, but the outcome was irreversible. To alleviate the guilt and anxiety from murder, he continued killing, ultimately plunging into ruin. Within this narrative, rather than feeling pity for Macbeth, it is more natural to learn the lesson of karma through his story. Macbeth is nothing more than a murderer blinded by ambition and power. Driven solely by desire, he resorted to extreme murder as a means to seize power. He lacked the courage to uphold his conscience and convictions. Had he possessed even the courage to stand by his conscience and beliefs, he would not have met such a tragic end.
We must learn a lesson from Macbeth’s story. Many voices of witches still exist in the world. Yet it is crucial that we do not let ourselves be swayed by the witch’s prophecy, but instead walk our own path steadfastly. Through Macbeth, who was left with only desire and murder, we must realize the importance of living a life that upholds our own convictions and conscience. We too must look inward today and ask whether we are being bewitched by the witch’s voice and walking the path to ruin.
